NJ: Out-of-state sex offenders can challenge registration requirement
Authorities must weigh whether a sex offender convicted in other states committed a crime similar to a Megan’s Law offense before forcing them to register under the law in New Jersey, an appellate court found Monday.
The ruling, which ordered two cases in Secaucus and Union City reopened motions to dismiss and reversed a conviction in the Secaucus case, says authorities in both cases failed to perform an analysis required by law before charging the two men with failing to notify authorities that they had moved.
“Indicting defendants before affording them the opportunity to challenge whether their out-of-state conviction is similar to a New Jersey Megan’s Law crime offends principles of due process and the statute itself,” Judge Morris Smith wrote for the three-judge panel.
The panel sent the case back to Superior Court to weigh the motions to dismiss.
State law requires individuals convicted of sex offenses in another state to register under Megan’s Law if they relocate to New Jersey, but the law contains a due process requirement that mandates authorities determine whether the law the person was convicted under is similar to a Megan’s Law offense.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
They’re decent in NJ. I was late registering once I moved there, but they let it go. Then I left without telling them. I got arrested. But NJ declined to extradite. So they let me go and that was eight years ago. I’m not on that registery anymore. But I’m still on NY because they don’t remove you for leaving. Go figure.
For those who are not aware New Jersey IS where Megan’s Law started signed into law by Governor Christine Todd Whitman on October 31, 1994 also made retroactive. “GEE, HELLO HERE I AM” On July 25th, 1995 New Jersey Supreme Court found Megan’s Law constitutional. It is what started this whole mess. Even though it is not an extension of punishment the state must provide “Due Process” under the 14th Amendment – as they were using the Civil side of the ACT for the registry against people who were convicted prior to the law. Because I was a part of this, I know what New Jersey Congressman Dick Zimmer did to hide the punishment in his Federal Amendment H.R. 2137. Who is this? New Jersey U.S. Congressman District 12, Mercer County, Hamilton Twp. the Kanka’s Congressman. No bias here against us… I had to explain this because a specific paralegal had no clue who this was telling me I was slandering his mans name.
The difference between New Jersey and Alaska is, Alaska WAS a full wide open public registry as New Jersey is tiers to this day. Alaska didn’t have Due Process because there was no process. This was before Federal Law where as New Jersey was required under constitutional law for Ex Post Facto’s because it is AFTER Federal Registry law (9/13/1994) but before federal public notification law. (5/17/1996) Florida is not retroactive (10/01/1997), but then used other states retroactive judgements to enforce registry but refused to honor any ex post facto or any civil judgement ruled not for public notification because they are using H.R.2137 that is for “Sexually Violent Offenders” against any low level non violent people forced to register in other states for a FULL PUBLIC REGISTRY.
This is where I am in the middle. I’m a retroactive challenger of the public notification and I won. This was stripped away from me by Lee County Sheriff Dept and FDLE without any notice held on it for years by intimidation, bullying and threats to enforce public notification against me trying to get me to move. They are using the Federal Law to enforce public notification against someone who is a Tier Level 1 before the Federal law. Now they lied stupidly to cover their ass hitting me with Smith v Doe saying I didn’t establish residency until 2006 when it was actually 1998. This is why I can see the public shaming punishment clear as day as it’s taken a long while to get others to understand. Even Val Jonas didn’t understand. We can’t just put a Band-Aid on a hemorrhage we need to expose this corruption against us I’ve uncovered what he did. 40,000 people just in Florida this will effect. 45% on the registry being punished with a hidden public shaming punishment. This could take the whole “Offender” classification off the public registry. they will not be happy with that. I laugh when they hit me with Florida has sovereignty, I have all 4 parts. 1. Constitutional Due Process 2. Prior to Federal Law 3. Judgement stated non disclosure, and the most important, it violates the 5th Amendment. Bye-Bye Sovereignty law. Any word on HB 45 yet?
What is it, specifically (by citation to a case), that you’ve won?
YEP, It’s the documents that they are trying to hide with a lie.
I beg to differ, Florida was retro-active. My case was 1991, but was applied when it came about in 1997. I have been on it now for 29 years. Registering 4 times a year for 29 years equals 116 times I have registered now and I have every single paperwork to prove it, locked in a safe, awaiting the day I can have a celebration bon fire with them.
Hey Brother >> I knew a few people who were here before 10/01/1997 because they didn’t register in another state they didn’t have to register here. We sent 2 of them from New Jersey right out of custody before they registered because the state didn’t have a registry yet.
Let me explain what I meant. The state of Florida law started on 10/01/1997 It was non retroactive for people in Florida meaning there is no retroactive due process. What they changed was that if you ever had to register in another state before their 10/01/1997 law. THAT is how they have a lot of retroactive from other state registries. Now if you were convicted prior to this date in Florida and were released after 10/01/1997, I have no idea, I’m from New Jersey. I know a lot of the states got smart an started making retroactive register before release.
In Florida, if you were on any sanction relating to a sex offense as of 10/1/97, you are required to register as a sex offender here. Please remember this is a FLORIDA forum, so when we speak of “registration requirements” we are referring to FLORIDA requirements. If you are referring to laws of other states, please be mindful that the people reading this are, for the most part, dealing with Florida requirements. We do not want people to come on here and make general statements about requirements that may very well be the case in other states, but are completely inapplicable here. People might rely on that and get arrested.
I have seen time and time again people getting off the registry and moving the Florida, only to be applied onto our registry. If I ever get off of Florida’s registry, I will not leave Florida for many reasons, my family is here and leaving and going somewhere else could have unforeseen consequences.
I do realize some move once removed from registration to start over with a clean slate, but your charges will still follow you no matter where you go. Ultimately, it is up to the individual, but the state chosen has a say as well in some circumstances.
Jack – July is coming — The judge should apply the Ellingburg Test — Should find the retroactive parts unconstitutional.
Tearful
That would be a glorious day my friend. For me it is all retro-active since my crimes were pre-registration. So much good I could do in the World if I was off the registry. I have even stopped going to church because of people calling me out for being there, which is really sad. If you cannot feel safe in church, where can you be?
This is a brilliant application of the law. Bravo to NJ, and if it falls in The Garden State, then it can fall anywhere–even in The Sunshine State.
Chuck Tyler >>> You do understand Megan’s Law is from New Jersey. You do see my handle? I’m not Megan’s Law’s – John Doe, I’m Megan’s Law’s John Doe Ex Post Facto from New Jersey an actual retroactive Tier Level 1 public notification challenger. We lost against constitutional retroactive of the registry itself in early 1995 but gained Due Process on the public notification on July 25, 1995. John Doe v Poritz. There is more coming to be exposed. The house of cards are starting to buckle. People are starting to understand what I have uncovered.
Megans Law John Doe Ex Post Facto,
Can you clearly articulate, so that a lay person can understand, what it is that you’ve uncovered?
What we have uncovered is the hidden punishment in Megan’s Law. On July 27th, 1995 New Jersey Congressman Dick Zimmer introduced H.R. 2137 cited as Megan’s Law into Congress. https://www.congress.gov/bill/104th-congress/house-bill/2137
What he did was call it for “Sexually Violent Offenders” “Cited as Megan’s Law” for a full public registry but just so happened to have left low level offenders on the registry. What was found constitutional 2 days prior was a 3 tier classification system. John Doe v Poritz. He didn’t remove low level non violent offenders, he quietly placed Level 1 offender classification into a higher severity level that has public notification hiding the public shaming punishment. On May 6th, 1996 the Megan’s Law retroactive stats were published quietly because of what it would show.
1172 retroactive registrants in total, 644 for public notification.
Tier Level 1 – 528 (45%) Register Only not for public notification.
Tier Level 2 – 585 (50%) Moderate Level – today’s offender.
Tier Level 3 – 59 (5%) High Level – today’s predator.
He put Level 1 and Level 2 together in the Federal Amendment. He put us into Level 2 back on July 27th, 1995. He knew what he was doing. They voted with a voice vote unanimously the very next day on May 7th 1996, knowing this would be punishing all low level non violent registrants with a public shaming punishment any state that used this Megan’s Law. This has been hidden for years because no one could prove it is a punishment because of SCOTUS Smith v Doe.
Justice Souter kept this and the Ex Post Facto ruling of Megan’s Law hidden in the Supreme Court. The ruling is “Termed a Megan’s Law” because it wouldn’t get exposed it with Alaska and the 9th Circuit. When FDLE hit me with Smith v Doe I laughed being an original Megan’s Law John Doe Ex Post Facto. 117 of us fought and challenged the public notification after they first found it constitutional. Only 39 of us has these credentials who can expose it. When Middlesex County New Jersey Prosecutors Office saw it they didn’t understand it either. Not until I pointed out I’m retroactive Tier Level 1, a true public notification challenger on a public registry.
You do understand that what the law was in 1995, or even before that with the Jacob Wetterling Act, was replaced by SORNA/AWA in 2006. SORNA is retroactive. That was already tested in the Supreme Court of the United States (Gundy v. United States– 2019). SORNA is a floor not a ceiling. It sets the minimum standards for sex offender registration and notification programs that states, territories, and Indian tribes must follow, rather than the maximum limitation. Accordingly, states are free to set more stringent standards and Florida, particularly, has set much, much, much more stringent standards.
The case you mention, John Doe, etc. v. Deborah Poritz, Attorney General, was a New Jersey case, which has no bearing on us here in Florida. Still, in that case the NJ Supreme Court affirmed the constitutionality of Megan’s Law’s registration and notification components but modified its implementation to require procedural due process (judicial review) before certain notifications are made for certain tiers. That court actually held the NJ registry does not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause, Double Jeopardy, Cruel and Unusual Punishment, Bill of Attainder, Equal Protection, or Right to Privacy provisions of either the U.S. Constitution or the New Jersey Constitution.
Maybe I’m missing something, but I’m still not following what you have that applies to Florida or FDLE.
Modification Limits: A state cannot generally alter the substantive terms of a final judgment from another state, such as changing the amount of a debt or the length of a criminal sentence, because that would violate the Full Faith and Credit requirement.
Sooo, your saying Florida can use this “Court Ruled” retroactive civil judgement from New Jersey that was determined by the court not for public notification as it would be an additional punishment.
Then the state of Florida can use this but change this judgement from low level to now a moderate level, from not for public notification to public notification? I don’t know about that…
In Florida there id no level that is free from public notification. You state “additional punishment” and believe me, we agree with you that it’s punishment. But until a court deems it so, the State feels it is not punishment, their statute says its not punishment, and until a court that has some binding authority over the State of Florida tells it otherwise, it unfortunately is what it is.
Yes, this ruling it has EVERYTHING to do with my retroactive civil judgement, Florida and FDLE. This was the first one ruled Constitutional. I’m not fighting the Constitutionality of it. I’m fighting against the public notification. I don’t care about the registry, I do have a problem when I fought for it NOT be on a public registry in a court of law on this ACT (Civil Judgement) to just have the retroactive civil judgement used by another state, reclassified now as a sexually violent offender, then placed on public registry that I fought in court against under the Due Process I was granted under this ruling… When the civil judgement specifically states not for public notification, they can’t just use the judgement and ignore it.
A state cannot retroactively change a judgment to increase punishment for past conduct.
Due Process: The Fourteenth Amendment prevents states from depriving individuals of liberty without due process of law, which protects against arbitrary changes to final judgments.
That is a very valid argument, but unfortunately until a higher court deems registration and all that comes with it as “punishment”, the argument won’t hold water.
The closest we are coming to having a collateral consequence of registration deemed punitive is residency restrictions in the Clements case, which is currently pending. We also have Does v. Glass which is coming up for trial in a few months.
Unfortunately the stigma associated with public notification has not (yet) been deemed punishment.
No one has been able to come forward with this information as of today with an actual civil judgement from 1995 showing it. This is a needle in the haystack. I’ve read them both an neither are anything like this. How many of those Doe’s have an actual retroactive civil judgement that states not for public notification? None. Nada, Zero. FDLE hit me with Smith v Doe then lied to cover their ass. That alone makes me want to say challenge accepted. He ain’t me.. I’m able to show what was hidden right from the start they tried to hide. As I’ve always said and mean it, I’m not here to destroy it, just fix it like a professional would. I’m sure LCSO / FDLE have the legal documents just not saying it. This conviction was sealed from public notification by the court. So what law gives them the right to disregard the court ruling and unseal it? None that I know of.
Thank you with saying is. Pouncing stuff off helps me find things. Trust me, I don’t want to come forward, I really don’t care about it for me. It’s these kids who screw up in their young age who will pay the price if we don’t keep fighting them. I run away, I hate it. I don’t care what they have done to me today they can’t hurt me. I leave because I say screw it. It’s not worth the aggravation. Then something draws me back to this that won’t let me go. I’m the other half of the foundation of Megan’s Law. I read all of these court challenges an it’s like dancing around a circle but no one dares go in the center. Well here I am.